Last week, two blockbuster New York Times stories cast perhaps the most unfavorable light on President Barack Obama’s foreign policy performance since he took office. First there was the revelation that Obama maintains a “kill list” of potential al-Qaida targets and signs off personally on major drone strikes in the continuing global war on terrorism. While Obama’s involvement suggests a certain level of rigor in target selection, the article also highlighted the fact that the president is ordering military strikes, including against U.S. citizens, without any congressional or judicial oversight.
Next came the revelation that under Obama’s presidency the United States has not only continued but ramped up a de facto war with Iran, with cybertools intended to disrupt Iran’s efforts to create a nuclear weapon.
Both stories speak to the lack of transparency in the Obama White House on matters of national security — as well as to the president’s somewhat promiscuous use of force against declared and undeclared enemies of the United States. But if one puts aside the many good reasons to be concerned about such policies on legal and moral grounds, it’s highly unlikely that Obama will be hurt politically by these revelations: if anything, quite the opposite. While some members of the president’s own party might be offended by Obama’s actions, the great majority of Americans seem blithely unconcerned.
To understand why the existence of a presidential kill list won’t do much to dent Obama’s strong foreign policy standing, it’s important to remember that Americans don’t just like drone warfare — they love it. A Washington Post poll this February found that 83 percent of Americans approve of Obama’s drone policy. (It’s hard to think of anything that 83 percent of Americans agree on these days.)
The popularity of unmanned vehicles is not difficult to understand. They’re cheap; they keep Americans out of harm’s way; and they kill “bad guys.” That unnamed and unseen civilians may be getting killed in the process or that the attacks stretch the outer limits of statutory law are of less concern. Indeed, rare is the American war where such legal and humanitarian niceties mattered much to the electorate.
As for cyberwarfare with Iran, this falls into a similar category as drones. Americans don’t like Iran; they are deeply concerned about Tehran getting a nuclear weapon and have demonstrated a surprising willingness to countenance a military solution to stopping Iran from getting a bomb. In fact, a March 2012 poll indicated that 53 percent of Americans support taking military action against Iran “even if it causes gasoline and fuel prices in the United States to go up.” And no one likes when gas prices go up.
Given those numbers, it’s not hard to imagine that an overwhelming majority of Americans would be fully supportive of a stealth cybercampaign as a cheap and efficient way to thwart Iran’s nuclear aspirations. That such a move might represent an act of war by the United States against Iran is again likely of peripheral concern.
The final piece of the puzzle for the White House is that neither Obama’s drone war nor his secret war against Iran engages any serious partisan passions. Republicans are hardly going to be critical of kill lists or covert war against Iran. They might keep their praise to a minimum, but these are precisely the sorts of policies that Republicans have long supported. Even presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who has been anything but consistent in his attacks on Obama, would find it difficult to hit Obama on these fronts. In reality, there is a disquieting political consensus in support of these policies.
In the end, there are plenty of legitimate policy reasons for the course that Obama has set in fighting terrorism and restraining Iran’s nuclear program. But it doesn’t take a cynic to recognize there is a tangible political benefit here as well. After all, these stories weren’t leaked to The New York Times by accident.
Michael A. Cohen is a columnist for Foreign Policy’s “Election 2012” channel and a fellow at the Century Foundation.
You’re right, these stories weren’t leaked by accident. They were leaked on purpose and with a purpose, by the White House, with, most likely, the President’s approval. In the long run, they will hurt his election bid, because the majority of Americans see right through the charade.
Do you have proof of your claims? Were you also one who claimed the President wasn’t born in the US?
It’s what I believe. But, I’ll wait until the investigation is completed. Oh, wait. The investigation is being handled by Eric Holder. Isn’t he the President’s right-hand-man? Well, I guess we’ll never know the truth, so my belief is as good as anyone else’s.
By the way, don’t you think it’s kind of strange the detail of the leaks, from the expression on the President’s face, to pictures and word-for-word quotes from the war room? Isn’t is strange that so much detail and information has been leaked to Hollywood and the press to “aid” in the making of documentaries that include the incident? And don’t you think it odd that it all comes to light during an election where the President can’t run on his record, but needs distraction after distraction to keep up his popularity rating?
Guess I’d better shut up before they add my name to the not-so-secret-any-more Kill List.
Oops, almost forgot to mention: EVERYTHING THIS PRESIDENT DOES IS POLITICAL!!
What I find strange is that you base your wild opinions off of paranoid suspicions. But if suspicion is all that is required to make an opinion valid. It’s my belief that you have baseless hatred for the President and that’s what motivates you and people like you. He could do anything and you’d criticize him for it.
I don’t hate the President. I’d even like to play a round of golf with him. I just disagree entirely with his policies and agenda. It’s not good for America.
If you disagree with a liberal, it’s hate. Don’t you know that yet?
The most striking thing about this “kill list” is that if it were done by Bush (and it would have been) the howls from the left would be unceasing. Now, except for Glenn Greenwald and a few others, crickets. The Democrats are largely hypocrites on unconstitutional executive abuse of power these days.
The CIA and Military run this country. The President is told by them what threats we have, from a physical standpoint. What we do not have is protection from the threat of freedoms being chipped away one bill at a time by the same guy.